Top Law Schools

Specifically in Civ Pro.

My professor hasn't mentioned a few major cases in Civ Pro from jurisdiction that I know about because of the E&E etc. (supplements which she recommends and tends to teach from.) I've heard differing advice about whether to cite these on the exam or not. Input?

Thanks.

BeachedBrit wrote:Specifically in Civ Pro.

My professor hasn't mentioned a few major cases in Civ Pro from jurisdiction that I know about because of the E&E etc. (supplements which she recommends and tends to teach from.) I've heard differing advice about whether to cite these on the exam or not. Input?

Thanks.

Ask your professor. It will depend on the teacher.

BeachedBrit wrote:Specifically in Civ Pro.

My professor hasn't mentioned a few major cases in Civ Pro from jurisdiction that I know about because of the E&E etc. (supplements which she recommends and tends to teach from.) I've heard differing advice about whether to cite these on the exam or not. Input?

Thanks.

No. Just no.

BeachedBrit wrote:Specifically in Civ Pro.

My professor hasn't mentioned a few major cases in Civ Pro from jurisdiction that I know about because of the E&E etc. (supplements which she recommends and tends to teach from.) I've heard differing advice about whether to cite these on the exam or not. Input?

Thanks.

You should explain in your exam how their class was deficient due to the omission of certain case law. That, or you could just write an exam on what the class covers.

Your choice. And hey, this is a great opportunity for you to put into practice those analytic reasoning skills!

I aced a few classes first year, and I definitely cited cases not mentioned in class. That is not to say that I cited them instead of the class cases, but rather, I cited them in addition to the cases discussed in class. I have also cited my professors' law review articles on their exams.

Just make sure you use proper bluebook form

I asked this in every core class, and every professor gave the same answer: Unless the case was discussed in class, or at least mentioned in the reading, DO NOT mention it on the exam or cite it as support. But definitely ask your professors, because they might be fine with it. Just don't do it without checking first.

To those that gave productive answers: thanks.

JazzOne wrote:I aced a few classes first year, and I definitely cited cases not mentioned in class. That is not to say that I cited them instead of the class cases, but rather, I cited them in addition to the cases discussed in class. I have also cited my professors' law review articles on their exams.

Not sure if serious...

The fact that your professor didn't even mention it in class is a good indication of how much he cares about you knowing it.

Citing to cases not discussed in class but covered in the reading (substantively or note cases) can be helpful, in my opinion.

No, don't cite cases you didn't talk about. It will cure the inability to write a good exam. If you can already write a good exam and can use the cases cited in class effectively you don't need other cases to get an A. Furthermore, I think classes like Civ Pro and Con Law would be the absolute worst classes to cite random cases you haven't talked about.

5ky wrote:Citing to cases not discussed in class but covered in the reading (substantively or note cases) can be helpful, in my opinion.

I think this might have to do w/ both the prof and the law school you're attending. It's a not a "formula for success" by any means. But if the prof is fine w/ it, this might help you at the margins if done judiciously -- namely, in schools where it can be hard to distinguish yourself curve-wise because everyone is very smart and hard-working

I did very well 1L and didn't hesitate to do this when I thought it would add value. Never asked any prof's about it, but that was admittedly reckless.

You need to ask your professor. All of my professors have told me that citing cases is a waste of time. From all I have read, most professors do not add points for case citations.

I'm sure it depends like people have said but there are ways it can hurt you too.

For example, I didn't get to use this on the exam but I what I think was a pretty good idea in my Torts class was to try to argue that some negligence defenses -- especially assumption of the risk -- should apply to traditional strict liability cases. My reasoning was that the real point of damages (or at least the one my prof put the most stock in) was in deterring certain behaviors and making people think about the consequences of their actions and that goal is just as relevant in strict liability as in negligence cases. Further, we learned about neg defenses in strict products liability. Well lo and behold the restatement third said exactly what I thought made sense

I'm sure I could have found some cases that used the restatement position but just citing some random cases would likely been less useful than using what we did in class to come up with that on my own on the exam.

TL;DR: You can be overly conclusory in dealing with issues by bringing up random cases rather than analyzing them using just what was covered in the class.

shock259 wrote:You need to ask your professor. All of my professors have told me that citing cases is a waste of time. From all I have read, most professors do not add points for case citations.

Yeah. My Civ. Pro. professor is very weird. There are a few cases that she may have mentioned yet she expected us to mention them on the exam- not in great detail but still mention them. I would not have known to do that if someone who had her last year hadn't told me. It wasn't a citing thing but she wanted stuff like, "Pursuant to Red Cab the amount in controversy is presumed satisfied unless it appears to a legal certainty..." when I know we never covered St Paul Mercury and it isn't even in the casebook. The only reason I even knew about that case is because it's in Glannon.

Cite cases covered in class. Possibly cite cases in the readings that were not covered in class. Unless you know your professor gives points for citing cases not covered in class or assigned in your readings, you probably should avoid citing them.

BeachedBrit wrote:Specifically in Civ Pro.

My professor hasn't mentioned a few major cases in Civ Pro from jurisdiction that I know about because of the E&E etc. (supplements which she recommends and tends to teach from.) I've heard differing advice about whether to cite these on the exam or not. Input?

Thanks.

it's probably better to just cite the supplement

BeachedBrit wrote:Specifically in Civ Pro.

My professor hasn't mentioned a few major cases in Civ Pro from jurisdiction that I know about because of the E&E etc. (supplements which she recommends and tends to teach from.) I've heard differing advice about whether to cite these on the exam or not. Input?

Thanks.

Most professors expect you to use 1 or 2 or no cases in an exam question (at my school anyway). What they want you to do is apply the black letter law in the way the professor wants - whether you cite cases or not isn't that important.

Thus, it's probably not a good idea to cite cases you didn't study in class. The professors will just assume you got them from some outline, and you won't be earning yourself any points. That said, allowing cases not covered in class to inform your application of what you did study in class, and applying this on the exam, sounds like a smart idea.

johansantana21 wrote:

JazzOne wrote:I aced a few classes first year, and I definitely cited cases not mentioned in class. That is not to say that I cited them instead of the class cases, but rather, I cited them in addition to the cases discussed in class. I have also cited my professors' law review articles on their exams.

Not sure if serious...

I don't fuck around, brah.